U.S. troops using confiscated Iraqi AK-47s

I know we're not supposed to paste the whole article, but it's not terribly long. And it's astounding.


www.boston.com...

"U.S. troops using confiscated Iraqi AK-47s
By Andrew England, Associated Press, 8/24/2003 14:00

BAQOUBA, Iraq (AP) An American soldier stands at the side of an Iraqi highway, puts his AK-47 on fully automatic and pulls the trigger.

Within seconds the assault rifle has blasted out 30 rounds. Puffs of dust dance in the air as the bullets smack into the scrubland dirt. Test fire complete.

U.S. troops in Iraq may not have found weapons of mass destruction, but they're certainly getting their hands on the country's stock of Kalashnikovs and, they say, they need them.

The soldiers based around Baqouba are from an armor battalion, which means they have tanks, Humvees and armored personnel carriers. But they are short on rifles.

A four-man tank crew is issued two M4 assault rifles and four 9mm pistols, relying mostly on the tank's firepower for protection.

But now they are engaged in guerrilla warfare, patrolling narrow roads and goat trails where tanks are less effective. Troops often find themselves dismounting to patrol in smaller vehicles, making rifles essential.

''We just do not have enough rifles to equip all of our soldiers. So in certain circumstances we allow soldiers to have an AK-47. They have to demonstrate some proficiency with the weapon ... demonstrate an ability to use it,'' said Lt. Col. Mark Young, commander of the 3rd Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 4th Infantry Division.

''Normally an armor battalion is fighting from its tanks. Well, we are not fighting from our tanks right now,'' Young said. ''We are certainly capable of performing the missions that we have been assigned, there's no issue with that, but we do find ourselves somewhat challenged.''

In Humvees, on tanks but never openly on base U.S. soldiers are carrying the Cold War-era weapon, first developed in the Soviet Union but now mass produced around the world.

The AK is favored by many of the world's fighters, from child soldiers in Africa to rebel movements around the world, because it is light, durable and known to jam less frequently.

Now U.S. troops who have picked up AKs on raids or confiscated them at checkpoints are putting the rifles to use and they like what they see.

Some complain that standard U.S. military M16 and M4 rifles jam too easily in Iraq's dusty environment. Many say the AK has better ''knockdown'' power and can kill with fewer shots.

''The kind of war we are in now ... you want to be able to stop the enemy quick,'' said Sgt. 1st Class Tracy S. McCarson of Newport News, Va., an army scout, who carries an AK in his Humvee.

Some troops say the AK is easier to maintain and a better close-quarters weapon. Also, it has ''some psychological affect on the enemy when you fire back on them with their own weapons,'' McCarson said.

Most U.S. soldiers agree the M16 and the M4 a newer, shorter version of the M16 that has been used by American troops since the 1960s is better for long distance, precision shooting.

But around Baqouba, troops are finding themselves attacked by assailants hidden deep in date palm groves. Or they are raiding houses, taking on enemies at close-quarters.

Two weeks ago, Sgt. Sam Bailey of Cedar Falls, Iowa, was in a Humvee when a patrol came under rocket-propelled grenade and heavy machine gun fire. It was dark, the road narrow. On one side, there was a mud wall and palms trees, on the other a canal surrounded by tall grass.

Bailey, who couldn't see who was firing, had an AK-47 on his lap and his M4 up front. The choice was simple.

''I put the AK on auto and started spraying,'' Bailey said.

Some soldiers also say it's easier to get ammo for the AK they can pick it up on any raid or from any confiscated weapon.

''It's plentiful,'' said Sgt. Eric Harmon, a tanker who has a full 75-round drum, five 30-round magazines, plus 200-300 rounds in boxes for his AK. He has about 120 rounds for his M16.

Young doesn't carry an AK but has fired one. He's considered banning his troops from carrying AKs, but hasn't yet because ''if I take the AK away from some of the soldiers, then they will not have a rifle to carry with them.''

Staff Sgt. Michael Perez, a tanker, said he would take anything over his standard issue 9mm pistol when he's out of his tank.

And the AK's durability has impressed him.

''They say you can probably drop this in the water and leave it overnight, pull it out in the morning, put in a magazine and it will work,'' Perez said."

The AK is a better weapon, less accurate but more reliable then the M-16, also carries a few different types of rounds. The issue here is the lack of firepower supplied to the troops, how can you go to war without one gun for one man, Damn Bill Clinton and his budget cutbacks.


AK-47 is one of the best guns ever made, period, most of the guns these Iraqi's are using are probably 20 or 25 years old and still holding up.


Hat's off to Kalishnakov (Spelling?) great gun

Most US soldiers prefer the AK-47 to the M-16, because its the perfect battle rifle. The M-16 simply doesnt hold up too well under harsh conditions, jamming up alot, failing to fire, ect. In vietnam, soldiers would often jack the AK-47 of the bodies of slain VC because its reliable.

The AK is tough. It can take a beating, it can even fire underwater. Its a perfect weapon for the dusty, dirty, sandy conditions in Iraq, because it can get dirty and still function.

I know in Saudi we had all sorts of problems with our M-16s jamming up and double feeding, misfires, ect. They are nice sniper weapons, but most soldiers dont need accuracy and range, they simply need a gun that can spray high amounts of lead somewhere in the general vicinity of the enemy, one of the rounds will probably hit.

The Russians sure outdid us in this area, the AK-47 is a fine battle weapon for the general infantry and soldiers around, its too bad our own govonrment doesnt work on making a weapon better suited to real combat instead of simply helping out thier buddies and buying a weapoin because of contracts and such. The US army would be pleased to have a weapon as reliable and tough as the AK in its arsenal.

What worries me is that they said they aint got enough to equip everyone over there..........we send the kids over there to fight.....with not enough weapons and ammo?

More proof the invasion was hasty and the goal was oil. . What the hell they expect our kids to fight with, rocks and foul language?

www.urbanoperations.com...

From there you can find more on this.. i first read the fact there.. about G.I.s using AKs.. btw.. there you can read internal USMC study of the war.. it is to me VERY strange that 99% of kill made by ASSAULT RIFLE / CARBINES.. were at ranges of 20-30m.. I have fired more than 1000 rounds with AK type weapon, and i know that it is very effective and accurate up to 300m.. what is wrong with US TROOPS? 30m? Dont they know how to shoot? Even longest range sniper kill of US TROOPS was at 600m and this was only one shot.. longest shot.. 99,99% of US "sniper" shots were taken at ranges less than 300m..

tietokannat.mil.fi...

Look the video.. that is the weapon im good with.. 7,62 RK 62

Originally posted by FULCRUM
www.urbanoperations.com...

From there you can find more on this.. i first read the fact there.. about G.I.s using AKs.. btw.. there you can read internal USMC study of the war.. it is to me VERY strange that 99% of kill made by ASSAULT RIFLE / CARBINES.. were at ranges of 20-30m..

I have fired more than 1000 rounds with AK type weapon, and i know that it is very effective and accurate up to 300m.. what is wrong with US TROOPS? 30m? Dont they know how to shoot? Even longest range sniper kill of US TROOPS was at 600m and this was only one shot.. longest shot.. 99,99% of US "sniper" shots were taken at ranges less than 300m..

tietokannat.mil.fi...

Look the video.. that is the weapon im good with..

7,62 RK 62

How many times you fired when 30 people were firing at you? Are you really this naive?

??????????????????????????????????????????????

aHEEM.. 20-30m.. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? Why so close ranges? Iraq, well most of it is FLAT.. you can see 10km-30km in clear day if there is no obstacles in LOS.. (line of sight..) 20-30m is to close, unless you are fighting inside of BUILDING. In a city ranges would normally be 50m (rare) to 300m.. 150-200m being the normal range for AR:s..

www.club.guns.ru...

Look that small video.. it shows what kind of beating AK can take and still function..

www.club.guns.ru...

And that is good pages about many russian guns.. mostly new ones "1980-2003"..

Betting that you have never been fired at by a BB gun, much less a rifle, I'll try to explain.


See, little boy, in war people don't stand still and say, hey you! it's about 230 meters between us, go ahead take a good aim, I'll wait, then it's my turn. People are shooting at you with guns, morters, rockets, bombs, tank shells, napalm, etc, you can't sit there and aim in the middle of a battle. Oh, yes lil' one, there are buildings, dirt mounds, trenchs, pill boxes, old tanks, rocks, mountains, hills, goats, and walls to hide behind. Not to mention cover fire, flash bombs, .........

See the object in war isn't to be hit, it's to live, you would have about a .5% chance of hitting me at 300m if I am firing back at you behind a wall.


You tell me you can hit something at 300M in a war consistantly and I and every other solder in this place is going to laugh you out of this topic.


Man, oh man

And to futher my point, mini-rambo, and AK has a terrible kick to it when you fire more than 3 burst rounds so that mean out of the 15 bullets you sprayed, 3 are going at me and 12 over my head.

[Edited on 25-8-2003 by Shining Wizard]

Shining Wizard, i find your comments offensive. Im no "little boy" i am 22 years old (born in 1.12.1980..) and i am a SOLDIER i know what am i talking about, being Platoon leader, NCO at rank of CORPORAL.. ">>"

And i am trained and VERY GOOD in operating LMGs, HMGs and ARs.. of 7,62x39mm and 12,7x108 calibres.. also LAWs and GRENADES i know how to operate..

SO BIG CAN OF STFU TO YA!

*edit*

almost forgot: I am designated MARKSMAN.

[Edited on 25-8-2003 by FULCRUM]

Well whoppie fizz, you haven't been to war, and I am happy you haven't, war is hell, 30 yards is a long way away in the woods, much less the desert which overs a lot less cover. Just trust me, 30 yards is a long way

Shining, with AK the bust is only to be used at storming of a building or a trench.. ranges less or equal to 50m, It is single shots that good shooter uses, aiming to torso or head.. to head at ranges equal or less than 150m, torso 150m or more.

I am not doubting the accuracy of the rifle, I am TELLING you that in a war you can take that number and reduce it greatly. Nobody is standing around waiting to get shot.

i dont really care which gun my troops are using as long as the rounds in the gun are going into iraqi bodies. preferably sadaams dome.

Originally posted by Shining Wizard
I am not doubting the accuracy of the rifle, I am TELLING you that in a war you can take that number and reduce it greatly. Nobody is standing around waiting to get shot.

Just look at here:

www.urbanoperations.com...

If you dont belive me.. and im not bashing americans for their poor rifle skills/kills, as during DESRT STORM, some us troops killed a iraqi officer at 1 mile, 1609m away.. with M82A1 BARRET.. i was just wondering what is with these QCB ranges.. during "Iraqi Freedom"

I gotta agree with Shining Wizard on this one (gasp!).

To give you an example, in Vietnam for every 50,000 bullets fired by regular troops, there was one confirmed kill.

Yep, FIFTY THOUSAND BULLETS for every confirmed kill.

ShiningWizard nailed it when he said you are firing not to hit, but to stay alive. At least 90% of all rounds fired are blind cover-fire. You spray and pray.

I just found it absolutely astounding that the US troops were not better equipped (and not GETTING better equipped it would seem).

I mean, the M16 was TERRIBLE in Vietnam, it always jammed and one single grain of sand could jam the firing mechanism. Why do they still use them?

Jakomo

Was this solder who was killed, aware he was being fired upon? If not, then our SNIPERS can and will hit you from distances upward of one mile, 1 1/2 miles with the .50 cal. Now the AK is LOUD, when sumbody squeezes the trigger and that sucker, everybody knows what it is and is trained to hit the ground ASAP, the only know i have against the AK is the kick, it's very hard to hit something below you with that gun, but on the other hand, you can drop than sonofabitch into a mud puddle and it will still fire!


All, in all, AK is a better gun, not accurate with automatic fire, but more RELIABLE than the M-16 and don't even get me started on the stoner rifle (belt fed m-16) what a joke.

Well, when your government cuts it's military (the one thing its there to fund) and gives social spending programs their biggest raise in 40 years, you're probably not giving the guys in the trenches the best you could if you would stop caving to Ted Kennedy and his massive melon.

I would use whichever or whatever was going to allow me to survive. If it happens to be an AK, then so be it.
Its always been a known fact that the AK was a far more durable weapon vs. the M-16.....that lesson was learned in Vietnam.

regards
seekerof

Like i said AK isnt supposed to be used in BUST mode, only cqb.. single shot is PRIMARY FIRE MODE.. here Finland the people allways laugh as we see in news people shooting WILD AND LONG BUSTS WITH IT, as we know that, this kind of shooting isnt effective.. we call it "Yalla, yalla" OR "Mullah" shooting.. cause Arabs and Africans ABUSE capabilities of this GOOD weapon (Kalashnikov AR) while shooting LONG BURSTS, as we know that even the strongest firer cant hit more than 2 rounds to 50m at man size target. AIMED SINGLE SHOTS ARE THE ONLY GOOD WAY TO USE AK.. Also US troops at Vietnam werent really not trained at first at least to use M-16.. so they SURELY BURNED away 50,000 rounds per 1 casuality.. 1 killed/wounded.. Machine guns are for supressive fire, rifles for "sharpshooting" 1 round, 1 hit.. but of course this will never be the case.


[Edited on 25-8-2003 by FULCRUM]

Fulcrum/Uninen: WHAT?! Are you some sort of drunken wanna-be military expert?

The AK-47 is for SINGLE SHOT? ?!? It's to be used as a SNIPER RIFLE?! Haha. It's an ASSAULT RIFLE, not a sniper rifle, and it's capable of firing 600 rounds per minute.

If you're going to pretend you know what you're talking, try a little harder.

Real Name - AK-47
Manufacturer(s) - Too many to list
Origin - Russia
Classification - Rifle, Assault
Feed - 10, 30, or 40-round removable magazine
Caliber - 7.62 X 39mm Soviet (.30in)
Rate of Fire - Cyclic, 600 RPM
Fire Mode(s) - Semi-automatic, Automatic
Operation - Gas-operated
Trigger Mechanism - N/A
Weight - 4,300g (9.5 LBS) Unloaded

Show me a SNIPER rifle that can fire 600 rounds a minute. Show me an assualt weapon that has the same effective (EFFECTIVE) range as a sniper rifle. Like the M40A1.

Good luck!

Jakomo